d20npcsfandomcom-20200214-history
Talk:Main Page
SRD particulars - what are they? I'm seeing lots of NPCs that use information not found in the SRD. For instance, there are no beholders in the SRD so we shouldn't have any beholders (or half-fiend beholders) here. There are no warforged in the SRD, so the same applies to them. Third-party sources shouldn't be used unless they've got their own special arrangements. PsiSeveredHead 15:21, 7 Jul 2005 (UTC) This website doesn't use the Open Gaming Licence, but the WotC general fansite policy (which I have linked to from the main site), so it is irrelevant whether a certain creature has been released under the SRD or not. Basically, as long as we don't copy monsters verbatim and as long as we don't use the information for profit, we should be fairly safe. It's probably safe to assume that third-party publishers have similar policies. That said, if such a publisher has any fan site policy that explicitly prohibits that kind of thing, please let me know and alter any relevant entries. But it is probably a good idea to write exactly from which Third Party books you are using stuff, and possibly link back to the publisher. This way we are less likely to get complaints. Jürgen Hubert 17:44, 7 Jul 2005 (CET) Created vs. Non I understand being able to use all WotC books as a source under the current policy, but I'm also seeing some custom monsters popping up (like Psuedonatural Lavawight; non-WotC template, which has been customized further for just that character, and I'm pretty sure a Lavawight is not a WotC monster either, Death, unique creature CR 26, a custom creature, The Vestige CR 27, a modification to existing WotC creature, A'tuin the Star Turtle, a custom creature, and many others who use The Immortals Handbook as a template guide, which is not a WotC publication). Are these to be allowed? It seems to me that the original intent of this website was to use WotC sources to mix and match NPCs together, resulting in NPCS that were completely adherant to the strictest of rulekeeping, provided the DM allows that particular sourcebook. I like that idea and I think this website should stick to creating strictly-legal NPCs, and let another site, like this wiki be a repository for the custom creations. I don't think adding in a custom feat, spell, armor, or weapon is terrible, but at least do the research and suggest a WotC-compliant option in place of it, should the DM want to not go for it. A good addition to the Help section would probably be a listing of all WotC sourcebooks for newbs to know where the line is drawn. And speaking of drawing lines, do you police the site at all, or do you have an admin team to do any weeding? Not just characters that don't comply with your mission statement, but many duplicate pages, orphaned pages, and stubs exist as well: A quick run through the shows plenty of duplicates and stubs needing deletion. --MidnightLightning 14:09, 6 February 2006 (UTC) I read through the original messageboard thread which gave birth to this Wiki and found that permission was granted to create custom critters, so, for ease of use, I've done some work to make them their own category. If you'd like to peruse that way, there's top level links in the Additional indices for d20 NPCs page, now, and also a Custom Creations category for you to use to flag entries as custom. --MidnightLightning 17:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC) :As an incidental note, Lavawight is not only a WotC creature, it's a SRD creature. --Fieari 17:09, 8 February 2006 (UTC) :Strange, I don't see it on the SRD monster index. There's a wight, but not a lavawight, unless it's a sub-category under something else? --MidnightLightning 17:29, 8 February 2006 (UTC) ::Check the epic SRD. Here's a direct link: http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/epicNonAbominations.html#lavawight Fieari 17:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC) Wikifying I noticed a lot of articles here look kind of ... messy. Anyone can use whatever style they want, but I wonder if the articles look so bland because no one knows how to use bold, italics, lists, and so forth. To help out, I added a link to wikipedia's tutorials. PS to sign an article, use three or four ~ rather than followed by your name (four puts a date on it). And don't start a sentence with a space, as it makes your article look really bad. I found that out the hard way. PsiSeveredHead 14:13, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC) br? Hey, why is everyone using -tags instead of, well, just normal line breaks? You know, hitting the enter key and such things. I know that the Wiki software can cope with HTML tags however with "real" line breaks the source code is much clearer and therefore easier to edit ;) . --Oracle of truth I'm using them because normal line breaks insert extra space between the lines, where a tag doesn't. For stat-blocks, this results in a more pleasing, compact layout. For comparison: ---- Half-Fiend Pixie CR 5 (6 with irresistable dance) CE Small Outsider (Native, Augmented Fey) Init +6; Senses Low-light vision, Darkvision 60 ft., Listen +10, Spot +10 Aura Faint evil Languages Common, Sylvan with line returns, and ---- Half-Fiend Pixie CR 5 (6 with irresistable dance)  CE Small Outsider (Native, Augmented Fey) Init +6; Senses Low-light vision, Darkvision 60 ft., Listen +10, Spot +10 Aura Faint evil  'Languages' Common, Sylvan with tags. I think the second is easier to read than the first. The additional compexity of the source code is worth this. In fact, in my opinion, the source code for the second is cleaner and easier to use as well. Your mileage may vary. Iron sheep 14:21, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC) WotC "Internet Policy" First off, it would be great to get a link to WotC's "Online Policy" that didn't involve signing up for yet another user account just to see it, but now that I did go through that rigamarole, I see that the WotC "Online Policy" is not an actual contract, nor is it something that you can find on their own website, but rather is a simple quote by an individual who no longer works for WotC... Am I the only one who's a little wary of that? I'm especially wary, since I was thinking of putting up sample dragons from each age of some of the new dragon races from the Draconomicon, but don't know if posting (say Shadow Dragon) special abilities word for word from the Draconomicon is allowed (since it's not SRD). Or, if I were to do a breakdown of each standard metallic and chromatic dragon dragon (from the SRD) into a character stat block, that seems to be okay, but that's what the Draconomicon's last chapter is; a sample dragon from each age category from each of the ten SRD dragon races. Is that allowed? --MidnightLightning 14:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC) :It could be claimed that even without that policy, even though we aren't using OGC, that what we do falls under fair use. Esspecially as in most cases using non-core rules, the rule is referenced but not explained, which means that anyone wanting to use that NPC would do well to buy the rulebook anyway. Remeber the qualifications for fair use: :#the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; :#the nature of the copyrighted work; :#the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and :#the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. :In answer... :#We're definitely non-profit. :#The nature of the copyrighted work is a repository of rules, while our work is a usage of those rules. :#We're hardly using the smallest fractions. Heck, in many cases, we aren't even using the same terminology. Remember, game rules can't be patented, only copyrighted, so if the exact words aren't used, there isn't even a copyright violation. :#It could be argued that our work promotes the original product, and encourages people to buy it. :I think we're still safe. Fieari 17:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC) Main page edit wars Why the huge edits to the front page, which makes it impossible to find the NPCs? I'm restoring the deleted information. If someone wants to make huge edits again, please post your reasons why on the talk page. Otherwise I'll undo the edits and request the main page be locked. PsiSeveredHead 18:13, 26 February 2006 (UTC) On a related topic - where's the link to the product list gone to? Infernal Teddy I'm actually going to revert the front page one full iteration backwards to get the missing links back. The revision put up by PsiSeveredHead is a much older backup and is missing a bunch of the more recent pages. M Jason Parent Just reset the main page again *Sigh* Infernal Teddy Banning? Can we ban 209.123.8.145 ? That account has been destroying pages on a regular basis it seems. I'm back-tracking and fixing the edits (which include the front page on two occasions) Agreed, it would be a great idea. Anybody know what's up with ENWorld? Infernal Teddy